5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-07-2008, 07:40 PM
  #11  
crueheadstang87
3rd Gear Member
 
crueheadstang87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 593
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

I have to agree with everyone else and disagree with your friend.
crueheadstang87 is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 07:50 PM
  #12  
stangman94
4th Gear Member
 
stangman94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,561
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

ORIGINAL: mjr46

hmmmm[&:]guess I'll never find out what my new 347 will do cause before she'll go she'll blow!!so tell your friend..................[>:][>:]
haha double meaning
stangman94 is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 08:35 PM
  #13  
nitrous_bob
6th Gear Member
 
nitrous_bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: st clair shores MI
Posts: 6,028
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

actually he is partially right

if it's driven a lot, you may wanna go 327 to eliminate some drivability/streetability issues

nitrous_bob is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 08:47 PM
  #14  
Joel5.0
5th Gear Member
 
Joel5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

ORIGINAL: nitrous_bob

actually he is partially right

if it's driven a lot, you may wanna go 327 to eliminate some drivability/streetability issues

..... like..... ??????
Joel5.0 is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 08:52 PM
  #15  
nitrous_bob
6th Gear Member
 
nitrous_bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: st clair shores MI
Posts: 6,028
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

Most 347 kits require the piston to be so short that the piston pin intersects the oil rings , causing increased oil consumption, overheating, the 347 is not an ideal street motor due to rapid wear on the rings (from the relatively low rod ratio) and increased oil burning


327/331 is just better....... but if you have a race car that doesn't see much street time.... go 355 and take it to the limit
nitrous_bob is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 08:55 PM
  #16  
nitrous_bob
6th Gear Member
 
nitrous_bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: st clair shores MI
Posts: 6,028
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

my buddy specifically went 327 for those reasons and what else i don't recall....another said if he did it again...he would NOT go 347

learn from others....i wish the internet was around when i started modding my '90....back in '90
nitrous_bob is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 09:06 PM
  #17  
silver91gt
5th Gear Member
 
silver91gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location:
Posts: 3,195
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

if I were to do it again, I too wouldnt go with a 347.
windsor all the way!!! 427 stroker would be easier to get more power.
silver91gt is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 09:14 PM
  #18  
Joel5.0
5th Gear Member
 
Joel5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

ORIGINAL: nitrous_bob

Most 347 kits require the piston to be so short that the piston pin intersects the oil rings , causing increased oil consumption, overheating, the 347 is not an ideal street motor due to rapid wear on the rings (from the relatively low rod ratio) and increased oil burning


327/331 is just better....... but if you have a race car that doesn't see much street time.... go 355 and take it to the limit
The only reason why a 347 will not last..... is if it's not built correctly.... as any other engine. The rod ratio myth is an excuse for poor engine buildup........ aside a 347, I have also owned other setups with similar, or worse, rod ratios...... that have lasted 250k+ miles of literal abuse w/out any problems....... not to mention the ones I work on regularly..... that include Subaru's that have the "infamous" piston pin intersecting the oil rings stock........ quality machine work, check those clearances, build it right..... and it will last the same mileage another engine will...... or is a "rod ratio problem" exclusive to a 347 setup

Joel5.0 is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 09:31 PM
  #19  
Milton
3rd Gear Member
 
Milton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ontario
Posts: 720
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

im gonna have to agree with everyone here, its not too big its actually quite common. isnt it .030 or .040 over? maybe his friend ment you just cant drop the stoker kit in with out some machining cause technically it is too big of pistons "stock" block. if thats the case its a bad choice of words cause its still the same block
Milton is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 09:51 PM
  #20  
woodsy
3rd Gear Member
 
woodsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 755
Default RE: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?

ORIGINAL: nitrous_bob

Most 347 kits require the piston to be so short that the piston pin intersects the oil rings , causing increased oil consumption, overheating, the 347 is not an ideal street motor due to rapid wear on the rings (from the relatively low rod ratio) and increased oil burning


327/331 is just better....... but if you have a race car that doesn't see much street time.... go 355 and take it to the limit
First off, the probe piston used in the 347 is the same piston used in the 331 [:-] Chevys have had the piston pin in the oil ring since jesus roamed the earth [:-] Overheating, thats funny! Rod ratio is useless, take a gander at a 454 chevy rod ratio or better yet a 400 chevy rod ratio [:-] Of the 37 current engines we are buidling in my shop 32 are 347's. I am going to have a **** pile of smokers on the road, stay to the right as they pass you by
woodsy is offline  


Quick Reply: friend says 347 is too big on a stock block?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:47 AM.